Canon EOS-1D X overview

The Canon EOS-1D X is the latest in the company's professional range of DSLRs. Its job is to replace both the sports-orientated 1D series and the high-resolution, studio-focused 1DS range of cameras. As is usual for upgrades in this class of camera, the changes are incremental and subtle but aim to raise the bar of what is possible.

The biggest specification change to the 1D X is its new sensor - an 18MP full-frame CMOS chip capable of shooting at 12 frames per second. This represents a big change over the 1D Mk IV (it represents a move away from the smaller APS-H format that Canon has previously used in its sports cameras), and a decrease in pixel count compared to the 1DS series. However, as Rick Berk, Technical Specialist in Canon USA's Pro Engineering and Solutions Division says: 'there's more to image quality than just resolution.'

The move from APS-H up to full-frame is enabled by a sensor with faster data readout explains Chuck Westfall, Technical Advisor in Canon USA's Pro Engineering and Solutions Division: 'The new sensor has 16-channel, dual line readout, compared to 8-channel, single line designs in the previous generation of chips.' This lets the company offer a large sensor (and the low-light capability that brings) for 1DS users, with the fast capture speeds that current 1D Mk IV users need. 'It's clear the time has come for the 1DX to replace the whole 1D series,' says Westfall.

Under the skin, the big change is the more sophisticated metering sensor. A move from the 1D Mk IV's sensor to a new 100,000 pixel unit affords the camera a much better understanding of the scene and this information is fed into the camera's autofocus system to improve the quality of its AF tracking. This isn't a new idea (Nikon's sports cameras have done something similar for several generations), but it's a sensible way of improving what's already an impressive system.

Autofocus changes

The other big change to autofocus is simpler configuration. The 1D X does away with the complex inter-related network of custom settings that defined AF behavior in previous models, instead offering six presets for different shooting situations (see table below). Each of these can be adjusted for 'Tracking sensitivity' (which defines how doggedly the camera attempts to stick with the originally chosen target or whether it will re-focus on nearer subjects if they cross in front of the target), 'Acceleration/Deceleration tracking' and AF point auto selection (how readily the camera should move off the selected AF point).

Westfall acknowledges the complexity of the previous systems could prevent users getting the most out of previous cameras: 'A common response to the 1D III and 1D IV was that people loved the idea of a high spec AF system but they wanted an easier way of get the most out of it. The improvements from the 1D III to the 1D IV were substantial but also incremental - to make a bigger step forward this time we needed to start from scratch.'

Canon EOS-1D X AF mode presets, defined by subject behavior:

1. Versatile multi purpose

4. Subjects that accelerate or decelerate quickly

2. Continue shooting, ignore obstructions

5. Erratic Subject Movement

3. Instantly refocus suddenly with obstructions

6. Subjects that change speed and move erratically

In addition to making the system more accessible, the 1D X has the first entirely new AF arrangement since the launch of the (film-era) EOS 3 in 1998. The new 61-point AF sensor has 21 cross type AF points at the center, which are sensitive enough to be used with lenses with maximum apertures as slow as F5.6. The central five of those points also have diagonal AF elements that are active with F2.8-and-faster lenses. All other AF points are sensitive to horizontal detail with lenses faster than F5.6, while 20 of these (in two flanks towards the outer edges of the sensor), act as cross-type points with F4 maximum aperture lenses or faster.

As with the EOS 7D, the AF point selection can be narrowed-down to a series of sub-sets of local AF points. It's also possible to adjust what factors are considered during AF tracking: AF info only, AF and color information or AF and face detection information.

Getting a sense for the sensor

When asked to for the biggest improvement in the new camera, Westfall stresses that every aspect of the camera has been re-assessed but finally concludes: 'If you had to highlight just one thing, I'd say the sensor. It's a new level for us in terms of image quality.'

'There's a couple of things that we consider when we think about IQ: number one on this sensor is noise. It's clear the noise level is better than in the 1D Mk IV or the 1DS III. The pixel size is larger than in the 1DS III or 5D Mark II (6.95 microns, versus 6.4) and the difference is even more striking compared to the 5.7 micron pixels in the 1D Mark IV. That helps us in terms of light capturing ability and increases the signal to noise ratio. In turn, that does nothing but help the dynamic range of the camera.'

And its this improvement in image quality that Westfall believes will make the 1D X appeal to 1DS as well as 1D users. 'I think the factor that's going to make that a reality is the noise level is better than anything we've seen before. With cleaner images, people are going to feel much more comfortable up-rezing an image. Not many people need a 21MP file to begin with, so they're going to love the IQ of this camera and the quality's good enough that those people who do need those huge files will find the images clean enough to use them.'

Changes to the body

The body of the 1D X closely resembles previous 1D cameras, but close examination reveals a series of changes. The most significant is perhaps the addition of a second joystick on the rear of the camera, to ensure all functions remain available when using the portrait orientation grip. The camera also features twin buttons next to the lens, in either orientation. These are customizable, allowing you to access features such as the electronic level gauge or jump to registered AF point.

Beyond this, the camera gains a direct live view button, a 'Q' button to jump to the 'Quick' function menu, and has had its flash exposure lock button re-dedicated as a customizable function button.

Processing power

As you'd expect, the camera's processing has received a considerable refresh, Westfall explains: 'You've got dual Digic 5+ processors, which our engineers are telling us are 17x faster than the Digic 4s used in the existing models.' In addition, the metering sensor, given its added complexity and the need to interpret its output to feed into the AF system, gets its own Digic 4 processor.

This processing power allows the camera to conduct a wider range of lens corrections. In addition to the vignetting correction that could be conducted by the 1D Mark IV, lens profiles can be uploaded using EOS utility and the camera will correct for geometric distortion and chromatic aberration (both lateral and axial) in real-time. These corrections are all optional and can be engaged separately.

Another benefit of more processing power, combined with an improved sensor is an expansion of ISO range, says Westfall: 'The ISO range on this camera, just the standard range, goes from 12,800 on the 1D Mark IV and 1600 on the 1DS Mark III, up to 51,200. And this can be expanded up to 204,800 - that's going to be an enabler of all sorts of new possibilities for a lot of people.'

The final processing option is the ability to shoot multiple exposure images. Four combination methods are available, which can be used to create composite images either from consecutive shots or from an existing Raw file and an additional exposure.

All about speed

The faster sensor and greater processing power are combined with a new carbon fibre shutter and revised mirror mechanism to allow 12 frame per second continuous shooting. The camera can shoot at 14fps if you're happy to lock the mirror up (and hence lock focus), and capture only JPEG images. The shutter has a rated lifespan of 400,000 cycles (a 30% improvement on before, despite the additional demands of the faster continuous shooting). The company also says it should be more accurate at high shutter speeds. It also offers an X-sync speed up to 1/250th of a second.

At first, the move from 10 to 12 frames per second doesn't sound terribly impressive - until you remember that the camera is now based around a larger sensor, so there's a much bigger mirror to move. Westfall is keen to stress this: 'The high-speed rate is greatly improved. Our full-frame cameras up until now have only been able to offer up to five frames per second, whereas this can shoot at 12fps, or 14 if you're willing to shoot JPEG. The 1D X means you can have full-frame quality and high speed.'

The EOS-1D X gains twin customizable buttons next to its lens mount - one set for each orientation

In the frame to be flagship

Of course it's no longer enough for a camera at this level to just be able to shoot stills, and the EOS-1D X is Canon's most capable movie shooter yet. Although the headline spec (1080p at 30, 25 or 24 frames per second), isn't exactly groundbreaking, it's clear that Canon has had movie shooters in mind.

The 1D X offers two compression options, including 'All-I,' a very low compression format that offers high image quality and editability but at the cost of immense files (a 16Gb card will hold around 6 minutes of footage). The alternative is a more standard IPB compression that takes up around 1/12th of the space. To prevent these large files limiting the camera, the 1D X is the first Canon to be able to split a single piece of footage into multiple files, overcoming the 4Gb limit of the card file system, and allowing videos of up to 29 minutes, 59 seconds to be recorded.

In addition the camera can keep track of how long it has been recording, using standard timecoding methods. There's also greater-than-ever control over the microphone input volume, with 64 manually selectable levels, auto and a wind-cut filter. It's also possible to mute sound recording while shooting.

Westfall believes the 1D X has the features that pro shooters will want: 'I think people are looking for a balance between cost and performance - the cameras offering 60P at the kind of bit rates that we can offer tend to be in a higher price bracket. And we can offer 720p at 60 frames per second,' he says.

'People we're dealing with are tending towards using 24 - to match the filmic look. There are cameras offering 60P in the consumer market but they haven't got the bit rate we're offereing. Many of them are limited to less than 30mbps while we're bumping up against 50. This is a clear difference - we think this product keeps moving the ball forward. With this product the focus was improving the compression. The other thing people were requesting was the ability to shoot longer clips and on this model we can shoot for up to nearly 30 minutes.'

'Within this range of products we offer, this is going to assume the flagship postition,' he says: 'It will be the most desirable product for people wanting movie shooting in a DSLR.'

Any other business

Beyond the big changes is a move to twin CF cards. As before these can either be set to duplicate images onto both cards or overflow from one to the next. You don't have the option of separately storing movies and stills, however. The upgrades to the camera also extend to a revised dust-reduction system for the sensor. The wave-motion of the shake system is being called 2nd generation dust prevention by Canon.

Another change to the 1D X's storage is the addition of an Ethernet 1000 Base-T network port. This allows faster transfer speeds and the use of longer cables (the limit is 100m, rather than around 3.5m for USB).

The final significant change is another gain from the EOS 7D - an electronic overlay on the viewfinder, allowing AF points and the level gauge to be shown in the viewfinder. Other than that, the camera retains essentially the same viewfinder specs as the 1DS Mark III - a huge 0.76x, 100% coverage pentaprism that 1DS users will be familiar with and 1D series owners will really appreciate after years of using cropped APS-H finders.

Couldn't agree more with Khizer...extremely bad sample photos at the website...really really lacks sharp focus on a high end high price camera...i wouldn't buy 1 if i have the money if i see those samples

I'm REALLY looking forward to the 1D-X review. For what I do, the 5d3 doesn't warrant an upgrade from my existing 5d2. I'm reluctant to "pull the trigger" on a purchase/pre-order before seeing the actual review from DPReview.com

It's all a bit quiet regarding the X don't you think. I will certainly not rush to be the first to have one, to discover a problem that has not quite been fixed. The delay gets my suspicion radar upto red alert.I hope it's a fantastic camera I'm pinning my hopes on this machine, I've never liked the DsmkIII I have and the 5DIII well not sure about that either.I like that Canon claims as a positive that the X has the same resolution as the DsIII. I kinda was wishing for an upgrade in that department. But if this focuses and has a significant DR, noise and colour depth improvement, it could make me happy. Or a Nikon 800 is on the cards.

Not sure if anyone is interested but i have some ISO performance reviews on the 1dX. These were captured when I was given the camera to test for a day so i used it to cover an actual event. Im not a professional reviewer so it may not be up to standards but they are just opinions on the performance. I didnt really get a chance to test all the other functions in depth.

Hey DPReview, when you get around to the full review, please answer this question: How does the remote live-view look through the ethernet port and/or wft-e6 transmitter?

I do a lot of remote shooting with my 5DmkII, but I'm always disappointed with the frame rate of the remote live-view over USB. I estimate the feed is no more than 10 fps, even in good lighting (probably a bandwidth issue). The HDMI port gives me a nice, crisp 30 fps, but I'd prefer to tether my camera with only one cable. Unfortunately this isn't one of the specs that Canon publishes, so I'm counting on your review!

fortunately, i use Carl Zeiss/Leitz lenses more than Canon lenses on my eos 5d2 i have ony the Canon 100/2.I don't have 135L but in general I don't like this focal.for me my APO-Telyt-R 180/3.4 is definitely better than all other Canon lenses (for example: all 70-200 and 200/2.8)and about my Planar 1.4/50 Contax...this is a lens in all effects !!!in photography are more importants the colours and sharpness instead of flash AF of this 1dx..but some Canon lenses have mummy colours.....it is simply: a ferrari (1dx) with cheap pneumatic (canon lenses)the 135L and 200 f/2 maybe are very good...but with wide-angle, Canon is behind Zeiss/Leica...the elmarit-r 28mm rom or Distagon 28mm...the elmarit-r 19mm rom..or Distagon 1.4/35mm or the new Distagon 21mm ... you will live in another world !!!

"Tell the Truth": Are you so much of a looser to utter such nonsense? Facts are that both these manufacturers sell prime equipment . We all reap the fruit from this fierce competition between these giant companies. Both these companies keep each other on their toes and that is good. You gain in one aspect and loose in another aspect. What made the Nikon D700 better for some? For sure the focus points. What made the Canon 5DMrk2 better for others? For sure the mega pixels. So what makes the Canon 1Dx the likely winner over the Nikon D4? It wins in three aspects: Megapixels, number of focus points and the higher shutter speed. The penalty is $800.00 which is tough.So for you Mr "Tell the Truth" that sold your Canon lenses for Nikon lenses...: Go buy yourself a D4. You will have an excellent camera most people will envy..., except for the Canon 1Dx owners because they will know they bought the winner in this supreme category!And for the record: I ordered my 1Dx today. Deposit paid.

I have to agree that both brands are good,but now you see Canon following Nikons' pixel metering system and trying out their own version of the Active D-Lighting that they haven't been able to match.Nikon topped the market with F5 back in film days,and set a benchmark with D3s(as stated in the review by DPReview).One company learns from the other, but it seems Nikon has the advantage.This is just my opinion of course and I'm sure Canon users can find things Nikon copied from them so the leap-frog will always continue.

Nikon copied many stuffs from Canon as well. SWM, multi-focus, weather proofing, etc, now the addition of joy stick in D4. But seriously I don't think its all the feature that make your photo looks masterclass.

the 24-70 and 24-105 and the 17-40 are not good enough and badly need redesign. Primes and longer zooms are OK, but for PJ work, and weddings etc these lenses need to be first class. Nobody would buy adaptors and fit other lenses losing autofocus otherwise, and it is this problem that makes me hesitate, and no other-if the dodgy AF my MkII really has been cured and the colours have accuracy at last.

You might have had the luck to get good ones, but more recently demand has affected quality-it is no secret, and this and the innacurate colour is still a big problem when you contemplate paying out as much as a small car now costs (with a 5 year warranty) for a 1DX you can confidently use with one of these zooms. And it is only guaranateed for a year AND costs much more in the UK than in the USA (still)

Few people looking at the end product give a hoot about *ultra* image quality when looking at PJ photographs as much as they are simply getting a nice (not fine art gallery quality) visual presentation of something newsworthy.

The 24-70 and 24-105 are EASILY quality enough lenses to mount to this new 18mp camera. Here in the U.S., small cars (even ones that people are not eager to own) cost a good bit more than a new 1Dx.

People (such as myself) buy adapters because many times it's financially better to put a pro lens from Nikon that you already own on the Canon, instead of buying the Canon version. Also, does Canon have a 14-24 f/2.8 zoom lens of excellent quality? No, but Nikon does and those are two major examples that have nothing to do with the quality of Canon's lenses.

Perhaps you need to get your equipment calibrated whether by Canon or by doing a micro adjust yourself.

I would like to think Canon learned a good lesson from the previous D/Ds range. A lesson at our expense. On paper this looks a very good camera, then again so did my DsmkIII. I'm tempted to run a Nikon system alongside my Canon to see which I like the most.Canon need more than words to win me over.If we are to believe the PR, then the 5D replacement will also have less pixels than now. So if the 8000 at 36mp is very good, Canon will not have much to sell anyone.I agree with the "Up to spec" retort.What would make me angry is the response to focus issues was always "we've never heard of a problem" When I could name a list of colleagues who had exactly the same complaint.

I shoot landscapes and events with my 17-40 on a 1Ds MKII and am very happy with IQ. Slightly soft toward the corners on FF, but really remarkably good for a superwide zoom. In terms of sharpness and contrast, it's close behind the 35mm f2 and well ahead of the 28-135. It has a bit of distortion that's easily corrected in post-production. If you want better performance than this, you have to go prime. Now, if Canon would just step up it's game with its wide primes...

People often forget the 'independent' brands, too. The Sigma 12-24mm lenses, for example, (both Mk 1 and 2) give excellent wide angle results for less than half the Nikon not-so-wide. Canonikon snobs need to look around more. The Foveon sensor is another case in point.

I just a little worry about their lens, all their lens even the 'L' ones have some kind of plastic coating, it degrade after some years and produce bluury images, I own a canon 28-70 f2.8L, after 5 years of use, the images started to look soft, I look through the lens, it seem like one of the elment have some softner effect, I took it to cann and they say that it is non fixable.

I also own alot of other lens like minolta 50mm f1.8, nikon 50mm f1.8, nikon 28-85, 18-200vr, pentqax 120mm, none produce this kind of problem

I want one to say the least. I wish they didn't make the announcement so far in advance of its release. They will probably be late anyway. They are late already on the new 500mm f4 II lens. When is this going to get here?

I use a 1Ds MkII. I cannot get good lenses for it. I have returned a 17-40mm, a 100-400mmL, and a 70-200mmL recently, and have tried out four 24-70mmL-none of which is as good as my old 24-85mmUSM, and have tried out 3 24-105mmL, lenses and bought 2 which were returned, as like the tryouts, they were soft and quite hopeless at the longer lengths across the frame.

So I fully understand the current problems Canon users have, none of which a new body addresses. The lenses are poor.

I am saving for a new machine, but why bother? as without the optics to match there is little point. Dealers box them so badly they get damaged (must be deliberate- you cannot do that by accident) .

Some lenses may be OK, but this new machine needs lenses that cover 35mm not the EF ones designed for cinema HD 2 Megapixel formats, and everyone is waiting for those. At the moment, its a con.

i'm not sure why that is the case for you. But I have used loads of L lens with 5d, 5d2 and also 1ds2 just like yourself and quite frankly the lens are spot on sharpness. In saying that though, my 1ds2 tends to misfocus every now and then, compare to 5d and 5d2 focus 100% accurately. Maybe you should get your 1ds2 calibrated ? Just a suggestion

I use a 1Ds MkII daily w/ 135f2,85f1.8,sigma70f2.8,70-200f4,28f1.8 and sigma12-24mk2. I have no problem getting sharp images as long as I keep the shuter speed up....even the cheap 28-135IS is sharp on my 1Ds MkII!

I'm in 'the trade' and get a lot of people say the same. It annoys me a little that it's always the lenses that get blamed. I've been to a factory in Japan to see how these lenses are made and how each and everyone is hand assessed.

A friend has a 7D and she kept blaming her lenses. Letters and emails went to Canon and after taking it all to a repair center it turned out it was actually the body's sensor that wasn't flat to the lens mount. It wouldn't have mattered what lens would have gone on the body, the images would have been soft.

To me, if you have 4 L series lenses which are 'hopeless' and a 24-85mm which is OK, you just have been lucky with that lens/body combo.

I've had customers try numerous lenses on a body in my store only to dismiss them. My advice is get the body back to Canon and send all your lenses too and get them all set up together. I'm not saying some lenses are not out, but to get 4 all out, I would start looking at the camera IMHO.

The larger sensor cameras, frankly, are exposing the limitations of all lenses, and this is true for all manufacturers. If you play with the microadjustments for lenses, and do it consistently, in a variety of conditions, I think you will find that there are many variables which impact the lens sharpness from one day to another. Temperature, humidity, a myriad of factors impact it. I have thought a certain region of a lens was less sharp, only to find that in another shoot, it's right on target. I'm not denying your experience, but I think it may be an unusual experience, and it may have more variance involved in the evaluation process than you might realize. The testing labs and media have not had the same experience by and large. Again, we will see more variance in the camera/lens combo sharpness as the new larger sensors expose the variance that has always been there, and in fact, to a much larger degree in the past than currently in the latest pro lenses.

I am asking for your patience and experience. I am a newborn photographer and I need a better camera. Considering current and new line-up Canon, what would you suggest. I shoot hand held natural daylight, often low light, and, like everyone else, I need perfect focus. Weight matters, but image quality trumps all. Need to get the shot in a split second. Frequently use 24-70 mm f/2.8. Thank you for taking the time to consider this question.

IT WOULD BE NICE FOR A CHANCE IF ALL SLR MANUFACTURERS MADE D-SLR WITH FULL SIZE SENSORS AND GET RID OF THESE APS SENSORS ONCE AND FOR ALL. EVERY CAMERA SHOULD HAVE A FULL SIZE 35MM SEMSORS ONCE AND FOR ALL!

At this point going to all full sized sensors would take DSLR's out of the hands of all but pros due to price.Maybe someday when the cost of manufacturing comes down.But there are some advantages to the APS sized sensors that some like.

Agreed. There has been a steady stream of professionals abandoning Canon for Nikon. The 1DX is a direct response, bettering (at least on paper) the Nikons in what had been regarded as their advantages. The announcement appears intended to stem defections.

Have a Canon and I love it (5D). Someday when I have the $$ I will get a second body. I am a photographer. It is frustrating to hear that all the camera manufactures are adding video. Perhaps there is a need for some, but give me a break! While reading this article it sounded great until "…it's clear that Canon has had movie shooter in mind." If I want to shoot movies I will use a movie camera! Thoughts anyone?

Yes as photographers its not the most the most exciting thing but I think HD on SLRs is great because you no longer need to buy a camcoder for great video and you wont have to carry 2 cameras, just use your SLR for both- how convenient! Another plus is that photographers wanting to branch out into making movies wont have to invest in new cameras and one other advantage of shooting movies on SLRs is the huge abundance of lenses you can use compare that to regular video cameras!Oh and its more economical to buy a SLR and some lenses compared to renting or even buying professional video cameras

Sigma DSLR cameras are pretty decent for people who want no frills cameras with no live view, no HD,low megapixels and are willing to look past lack of high ISO capability ........I dont mean to play devils advocate for Canon but what people will be paying for is the High ISO, improved processor as well as the HD , I think HD is an afterthought ...if they dont improve it competitors will outperform them and Canon users might complain and besides since Canon produce the best video on SLRs they have to keep improving it to remain the best

The movie shooting functions are only a matter of software, there's no extra hardware needed to shoot movies. Thus there are no additional costs to produce a HDSLR versus a DSLR without movie shooting functions. And, at the same time, the product is more competitive - wider range of potential buyers - for free.

I have to agree with vladmir vanek. here. if the camera were negatively compromised in any way as a stills camera in order to facilitate the video side, then there would be real cause for concern. But at no point do we a direct correlation between the addition of video functions and either an increase in price or decrease in stills performance.

The EOS-1D X is launching at the same price point as the EOS-1DsMKIII. There is no premium for the video features. They have been added on for free.

Most of the new features that make the EOS-1D X attractive are on the stills side: faster burst shooting rate, improved ISO performance, alleged better auto-focus, etc.

To complain about the addition of video because you don't use would be like a landscape or artistic photographer complaining about paying for improved auto-focus when they prefer to use manual focus.

Do you others actually believe what you're saying? No extra costs involved to add video?

What about extra programming time to add menus to support video and its settings. What about changes to the body to cram in extra buttons? What about designing a sensor that will run continuously without melting down from overheating? There are substantial extra costs involved in adding video to a DSLR. I'd like to see Canon offer two 1D X cameras - one with video and one without. Then we'll see if the buyers in this price range are willing to pay for the amateurish video function. I suspect that video in cameras at this level would be gone in a year.

Actually it costs Canon (and other manufacturers as well) virtually nothing extra in terms of manufacturing costs to add video. As a stills photographer that never uses video I don't see any advantage to me either but provided functionality of stills operation is not compromised there's not a problem. Of course the addition of video may be very important to some people and that's fine - it certainly has provided a marketing usp for Canon and others.

The only thing I can think of where video does make a negative difference for stills is with the adoption of power zooms (which I guess are probably necessary for for smooth zooming on video). For stills these are a pain - too slow and unresponsive.

People thinking that it would save money to skip video show a severe lack of reasoning - the firmware already has video support thanks to every other camera, and the most that might ever be on a camera button-wise that's dedicated to video is a switch from camera to movie mode. A whopping $0.20 worth of plastic, and maybe $1 or so worth of electronics to handle the signal.

There's no way it would be a large enough drop to make it worth dropping support. Not to mention it would cost Canon *more* to keep two manufacturing processes for the two different bodies, just to *remove* a feature.

I think there are always spontaneous, impromptu moments where a short video clip is a wonderful option. You are on a shoot planning for stills, yet you spot a moment worthy of a short video clip. The convenience of pressing a button and capturing that short clip is a nice bonus while using a beautiful still camera.

You should all sell your Canon gear on ebay and buy some MINOLTA lenses and that 24MP SONY A77 everybody is going nuts about. It may not be the best at high ISO but everywhere else it really rocks for only $1400.

No review so far mentions AF in video mode....I was wondering if $6800 is enough money to spend in order to get usable continuous autofocus in movie mode? Obviously my 7D I spent $2000 only on the day it was launched was way too cheap for that.... Same with my buddy's 1D MkIV - he spent only $5500.....Or should we switch to Sony??

The capability of high ISO hopefully means that mid level range will be much cleaner. Shooting a wedding at the time where no flash is allowed in a candle lit church. Sure you can use a fast lens and hope your eyes are in focus with a shallow DOF, but bumping up the ISO to 6400 for a clean image and an additional DOF is a welcome option. At this level, I would've hoped for built in Wifi for studio use, instead of expensive options. Eye-fi doesn't work well in my 1Ds MKIII so I use tethered if I'm not working with people.

You know I have been taking pictures for 25 years and have yet to feel the need for 6 digit ISO. Perhaps when I get paid to photo a coal mine. Call me a minority but I would actually like lower ISO, like 32 or 16 I would find it quite useful in studio and with landscapes. That said I shoot nikon and canon and both are fine tools and I don't really give one the edge over the other. I don't have much need for video but it seems that is the biggest thing Canon is offering. Much of the changes are to increase video performance so they must see that as important.

If Hasselblad keeps dropping prices while increasing performance and megapixels, Canon and Nikon are both going to be selling cameras to just the Ashton Kutchers of the world and not working pros.

As for photojournalists using Canon and Nikon, well, I call them the working homeless. Many of them just use the consumer models as they are paid peanuts because their industry doesn’t know how to move from paper to web. Newspapers seem to throw out all of their design principles and ethics when publishing online, New York Times website excluded.

BINGO…give me a quality camera at an affordable price without all the excess bells and whistles. A Photographer just wants to shoot, not take the entire creative process out! Adding some new technology to a camera is good, even innovative. Sometimes less is more!

Having had Nikon for 4 years (Nikon D3) and eagerly waiting for what Nikon comes with soon, I find that this is the most clever move Canon could make. What a perfect camera. I would switch today, if I had the $. No need for more than 18mp yet a ton of super powerful wellthought of featuers... If you want more pixels, then go middle format, to properly gain the missing details your wanting. Well done Canon... What will Nikon do, and when?

I know most high megapixel cameras produce rubbish photos !! just look at Phaseone IQ 180 !Journalists and wedding photographers will not be able to sustain your business you know. People are not getting married that often any more anyway. You need us Pixelnuts, rich kids, compulsive buyers, poseurs and artists to survive and we all want more res res res !!

MF peole are going to walk in big time, sure, but that is no reason to panic like this ! Nikon is not going out without a fight. D3x has been freaking us out since Dec 08.

Or put a sign out telling us to go away and this is the direction you are going in the coming decade. Soon someone will make a camera that shoots 100 frames a second from factory for ten years, nonstop. Then all you have to do is to point it. Where is photography going after that?

If the AF sucks, like it does with the Mk4 then it's going to have the life cycle of 100 years because everyone will switch. Three times the charm when it comes to Canon releasing problematic flagship bodies. Like another poster said, why is Canon offer so many AF modes? It should just work. Which is a sign that the AF issues are still there.

I beg to differ that the AF on the 1D MkIV sucks. In 2010, when I was not familiar with the various AF modes, keeper's rate was only about 5-10% for my F1 GP shots. As I understood the AF modes much better, I set it under the customized menu for quick access, to switch between modes. This year's F1, my keeper's rate was about 30%. There were simply too many pics that were tack sharp I had such tough time selecting the best. From what I gathered from your comments, you probably have not optimized the usefulness of the AF modes. 1D MkIV's focusing system is impressive and I am really excited to test the new 1DX AF system!

I think the point is that people feel that they should not have to program a camera to take sharp images with a competent focus system. Professionals want to be able to aim and shoot (within reason) and a camera costing $5k or more should deliver most of the time regardless what option I have selected in the focus system menu.

I think Canon will hit a home run with this body! Although I would like to see a very high res body- this camera makes the most business sense for Canon since most shooters don't need/want gobs of extra pixels they don't need in the course of business... and w/Med Format prices w/in only $5k or so of this flagship Canon, it's clear that Canon has their head screwed on straight. I find the camera (at least on paper) very compelling and I'm very interested for reviews to pour in months from now. I'm interested most in the high iso capability in the "realistic range". I hoping for around a 1.5-2 stop advantage over the 5d2 at 6400 iso.

I have D3 and D3s,...and have success with Eye-Fi and Extreme SD-to-CF adapter. I also have WT-4,...which of course works, but you can't beat what the Eye-Fi does at its price point. Lastly, I tested my Eye-Fi card (8gb Pro X2) in a D7K and it was a perfect marriage,...the camera loves the card loves the camera! JMD

32MP is a conservative number. I would like 50% more pixels than 32MP for now, well over 100MP (I consider 100MP as standard) in the future.

the truth is that there is very little, almost negligible tradeoff when we have times of more pixels. anyone can simply verify that by comparing D3X against D3, twice the number of pixels, nearly no negative impact on image quality, especially when you resize D3X to 12MP and postprocess it with Dfine (the same algorithm used by D3 to produce "half-cooked-raw" file).

It's the quality and size of the pixel not the quantity. I have the 1Ds MK II, 16.7 MP. Since march of 2005, I may have used each image to it's full size, 1% of the time. To this day, when processed properly from RAW, I can beat any new 18 and 20 MP image, especially at 1600 and 3200 ASA. If you are doing landscape photography, there are cameras for that. Also, these sensors are exceeding the limits of the optics. That's why I am waiting for Larger sensor with less pixels for the G13.

I like having extra MP for the cropping options and quality of large prints. This camera is the right one for its target market. Hopefully the 5D3 will have 26 to 32 MP and great image quality, at a slower FPS. That will provide a camera for each market.

at first canon introduce AF adjustment setting to get away their poor AF, now they have AF mode presets, does that mean they still get poor AF, and need the user to decide which mode is good?

I just know one thing, if the camera have great AF system, like the D3,D700 and D300 you really don't need to touch any setting, I don't need to use AF adjustment, and I stil have great spot on results from racing cars, latin dance, kids running to me.

from all my photo friends and my own experience, the best AF canon SLR are still eos 1, eos 1n and 1dm1

I have the 1dmk2n and the 1dmk4. I found the Mk2n reliable but the Mk4 has big problems with focus using zoom lenses. Zoom-in,focus is fine, but zoom-out and it front focuses.This happens on all my zoom lenses and two Mk4 bodies. I sent bodies and lenses at the same time to Canon Irvine for repair and it's still the same. I worry that the 1d-X could be the same way if they are holding the Megapixels at 18, then it won't be too obvious. Low light will also cause front focusing too. AF micro adjustments don’t solve this problem.

Second issue is you can’t use Eye-Fi cards with the removal of the SD card slot. Canon's expensive wireless transmitter device (around $750) is horrible and techs are not helpful at 800-OK-Canon. I got an Eye-Fi SD card and was up and running in 5 minutes. It cost about $150 for the most expensive card. I set up the Eye-Fi i to wirelessly send small jpeg preview images to the iPad and iPhone. Eye-Fi does not make a CF version and SD-CF adapters don't work.

I'd take lower resolution sensor with better low light performance over high resolution sensor witih mediocre low light performance any day (although Nikon gives us both options in the D3S and D3X). I wonder what would Nikon come up with to top this?

Nikon sort-of counts... 16-18 MP is the ideal size for most uses and the D3 had 12 which was slightly underwhelming. Now, don't get me wrong, I shoot a 12MP D700 and my complaints about it have nothing to do with his resolution but the D3 flagship could have been a 16MP maybe at a time where the 1DsMK2 was already there for a few years... hence the "slightly underwhelming" feeling

Hello Everybody!I'm a HIG ISO ADDICTED because I love low light situations.I've read that Canon has developed "PIXEL FUSION" tecnology.It merge a 3x3 sensor's pixel to work like one to improve ISO quality. It will be equipped on small sensors and mirrorless camera.

Does someone know if it will be available on 1D-X??

I don't care if it could reduce the amount of MP if it make me bring home pictures and videos when I should not without that tecnology or without a 1600$ lens.I have to add that i love low light portrait using hard macro.

OK I get your point.I Believe the 1Dx would surpass the D3s. I won't be surprised at all if this sensor could produce clean images at 12500 or even 25000.

Anyway, basically I'm on your side, but It's just that we sometimes expect too much and forget to enjoy and get excited by the marvels we already have. We hold in our hands technologies that just a decade ago would have seemed astonishing or even unobtainable.

No price info yet?I feel that many people will miss the 1.3 crop sensor. They could well have made it dual, full frame and an option for cropped operation with the touch of a button, then it would really be the successor of both EOS 1Ds and EOS 1D line.